social.outsourcedmath.com

Whuffo diaspora
You don't need to use violence to make a change. But those opposing the change might, and the police trying to keep order definitely will.
I'm disheartened seeing this, our culture have trained us to believe that the good life is to punish the "evil" people and in that way bring about change. I believe seeing the needs of everyone, and the beauty in them, is more useful
There's also scientific support for using nonviolence as a means to create social change: The success of nonviolent civil resistance: Erica Chenoweth at TEDxBoulder
@dianea I hope you don't mind my comments, this is an issue very close to my heart and of that i'm really concerned about
Nora Qudus diaspora
And nonviolence only works IF the other side has a conscience...can not work if the other side wants to kill you as a matter of normal.
Violence was never the answer to any question; the southern American hemisphere stands in testimony to the FACT that violence begets more violence. Mahatma Ghandi knew how it was done, so take notes and learn something.
And nonviolence only works IF the other side has a conscienceโ€ฆcan not work if the other side wants to kill you as a matter of normal.
Are you feeling discouraged or pessimistic when you see some politicians, and have a hard time seeing their humanity?
I donโ€™t want to start a war (of words). Thereโ€™s enough violence in our world already.

If anyone want to know my thoughts then please ask. I've been studying and trying to practice nonviolence for years
Bob Lai diaspora
"I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and a machine gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand."
โ€“ Yasser Arafat
smellsofbikes diaspora
I'm not saying I'm opposed to this. I'm saying the right wing and cops have spent the last 30-40 years preparing and actively wanting a civil war. That's what they know how to do.
greyshley diaspora
I'd like to add that, in early weimar germany, initial attempts at a right-wing takeover were foiled by a general worker's strike. (though the left-wing attempts were met with violence)
point is, power is power, and that doesn't necessarily mean violence/combat. (though it may involve it at some point)
Nora Qudus diaspora
I say there is nothing gained by being "nice" we have lost more and we are still being "nice"? Off with their freaking heads
Bob Lai diaspora
A general strike would be effective, but, as noted above, law enforcement is predicated on 'force.' Force/Violence = Compliance, and not always physical force. Economic force is brought to bear: you are threatened with loss of your job, your home, your 'credit rating.' You will become a non-person (poor) unless you comply.

What many of us consider a normal, healthy life ... isn't actually healthy or normal.
Richard diaspora
I agree with @[email protected]. Running headlong into an unpopular war the other side has prepared for you to fight in is not sound tactics.
smellsofbikes diaspora
We have a whole society predicated on the poor being treated cruelly as a warning to everyone else of how bad it can get if we don't comply, and it's very effective.
What John Lewis called "good trouble" just isn't the same thing as "being nice". Ghandi wasn't "being nice either", so that's a very false equivalency. When the violent side wants you to react to give them an excuse to call it ia civil war, then don't give them that war. The concept really is as simple as that, and not hard to understand unless you're somebody who is hell bent on not understanding that.
If you refuse to understand Ghandi and MLK and Lewis and the busloads of Freedom Riders and the Lunch Counter Sit-Ins then pay attention to Nelson Mandela fer crying out loud. Out of the huge pantheon of people who have proved how non violence works, surely one of 'em will ring a bell with you UNLESS you're hell bent on violence whatever the excuse because you're just a violent person who loves violence.
Nora Qudus diaspora
Gandhi failed in India. Non violence only works when the non violent side is willing to die by the hundreds and the "violent" side has a drop of humanity.
Dead wrong. India got its independence thanks to Ghandi's leadership, and Nelson Mandela didn't die either. Nor has Navalny and it's not for the lack of trying. So how 'bout you try again.
Michele Hax diaspora
I think if you, Clara, presented your position in a less confrontational (violent) way, you would probably help people understand, at the very least facilitate productive discussion, the importance of non-violent movements.

Just exactly how does a nonviolent movement work - especially in the context of the three leaders you identified? I believe that's a good starting point. @Sunyata โ˜ธ ๐Ÿ‘จ๐Ÿปโ€๐Ÿ’ป โ˜ฎ posted very instructive links. Nonviolent resistance has a long history of success. I think Erica Checoworth's TED Talk addressing her research into civil disobedience is profoundly instructive.
Richard diaspora
In the traditional US-ian context, non-violence appeals to people who would rather spend their time enjoying life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

This is in contrast to the roughly 1 in 7-ish of our fellow US-ians who appear to be inclined to threaten their fellow citizens out of some deep seated insecurity leading them to require the affirmation of privilege that, having been born in the last 30-35 years, they probably never had in the first place.

If enough people get on board with non-violence then they can form government that responsibly retains the monopoly on violence to keep the peace. That's not possible when 1 in 7-ish of our fellow citizens are devoted to anti-American seditionist causes. Our government is a reflection of who we are and at the federal level of government we are fascists and oligarchs.
Richard diaspora
Connecting the dots to finish the thought - fascists and oligarchs arenโ€™t historically known to be reliable wardens over the stateโ€™s use of violence. It was necessary for them to spend decades undermining and corrupting our โ€œgreat experimentโ€ to dispose of the fruits of the Civil Rights era and acquire enough power to get to this point.
Richard diaspora
The 1 in 7 voted for Trump. Twice.
Michele Hax diaspora
I'm looking at protest marches (primarily in this country), acts of civil disobedience eg when the Berrigan priests and other anti-war protesters poured blood on draft records and painted slogans on bombs, young men burned draft cards, The Janes' movement that helped women seek abortions, my friend chaining himself to the health department with a bullhorn, protesting the lack of research on HIV/AIDS and treatment of those suffering the disease, political work with people like Sanders and others, leaflets, newspapers, etc. Who are the 1 in 7? The 2% that affirm privilege, do not represent people in the grand scheme and they are the minority.

I think poverty is violence. I believe the dearth of comprehensive health care, housing, and the absence of high-quality schooling, climate change is violence.

I don't think this government is a reflection of who I am and believe more and more people get that. More than half already do. Apathy is not an option. People that oppose the use of guns, need to get on board and arm themselves if they think it will overthrow the fascists. They are so much more sophisticated in their surveillance and weaponry than we are, even armed because they are backed by government support. We see what happened to the Black Panthers. We see that when Cuba armed most of its citizens (including children) it was near impossible to invade and an embargo by this government ensued. Arm everyone, or arm no one.

I know this is an oversimplification. IMO, more and more people will get on board with non-violence. Unless a viable alternative is presented, it just seems to be the only course of action.
Michele Hax diaspora
He lost the second race, barely squeaking by. What to make of those people? How to sway them when the dumpster's next coup is already beginning? How do we work the legislative process to defeat him? Who do we put in office that truly represents all people's interests? Over 60% think the capital attack was planned. We need to start strategizing in earnst. What is the solution?
Michele Hax diaspora
They will try to hold on to that power. But it's a grasp that appears increasingly less tenable.
Yes, all true, alas. The Bolsheviks got revolution and look where it got 'em. The Arab Spring got revolution and look where that got 'em. Cuba has been in the business of perpetuating their anti-Batista revolution so they've been shooting at shadows in the name of the people...and speaking of revolutions for the people, that's how the Maoists took over Nepal after murdering every government official they could get their mitts on then proclaimed LIBERATION as they now make Nepal subservient to China. Liberation my ass.

Non-violence means that anybody spoiling for war will be denied their war. That's how it works.
Michele Hax diaspora
I participated in protests to outlaw the klan. I was met with cries of free speech. I marched on one side of the street with church ladies and picket signs, they were on the other side, armed. The police protected them. I'm not saying they're gone but the protests bore some fruit. Frankly, I'd rather had a weapon
Michele Hax diaspora
Thanks for pointing that out, @[email protected]. I feel like I'm pontificating in the worst possible way.
Michele Hax diaspora
I agree wholeheartedly with that, Richard.

I'm an old hippie and commie. So I'm going to have to say when Nazi tyranny grabbed hold and put dissenters in camps (first the communists), looking back in hindsight so many strategies should have been employed to stop them before they began blitzkrieg. The Battle of Leningrad was a huge pivot point in the war. And then this country slowly jumped onboard.

Cuba threw out casinos, eradicated prostitution, and began to rebuild. The embargo stopped progress dead in its tracks. The missal crises scared everyone to death and put a target on Cuba's head and the then SV. Was the usna looked at in the same way? We have a military base in every country and sit squarely in the middle of one-upmanship for nuclear armament. No one will win that war.

I say that non-violence is a tactic used to keep the oppressor distracted. Again, it is a very important way to agitate and propagandize.

Many revolutionary movements changed countries for the better. But when you're constantly under attack from Imperialism, those revolutionary movements begin to morph into something else. Like Russia. The United States of Mexico, Central, and South America, and surrounding Islands have been pillaged since the 1400s. Countries and people continue to fight against dictators. Dictators continue to grab power.

There is so much history to consider. I do believe if global unity isn't achieved, we are all screwed.

And then there's climate change.
Richard diaspora
For me the solution is to speak and listen to the people around me in real life and try to get some kind of shared commitment to our nation going.

Yes, my neighbors and fellow US-ians I've engaged with jump around the subject, flood the zone with poop, attack, lie, get up on their cross and moan about being oppressed, so on, so forth. These are usually reactions resulting from feelings that I acknowledge with the proviso "I talk about my feelings and try to do the right thing."

Once we get past all that, what matters is that, for the most part, as US-ians we have almost everything in common. It's easy to ask questions that we already know the answers to and then examine how things turned out with xyz leader ("and how'd that work out when Trump did that?") This cuts right to the bone of what I believe is making us so weak as a people - inferior leaders that have to rely on dividing us and turning us against each other just to stay in power.
Nora Qudus diaspora
The Arab Spring was fomented from the US saying they( they US ) would help, they left them twisting in the wind. The USSR went to space before the US did. And Cuba made a decent comeback when the USSR collapsed in spite of the draconian sanctions put on it by the US as revenge. Non violence has its place as does violent over throw.....the US was created by violent over throw as was France...Non violence is for those who have too much to lose and will do what they can to not lose it.
Spoken like a true Soviet as if Bolsheviks had anything to do with any of those stolen scientific developments. Russia remains violent and so is Cuba and most of the rest of Latino America that believes in forever revolutions. Violence is the proverbial tiger that, once you ride it, will consume you should you ever attempt to dismount, and it will consume everything around it until you do. #

This website uses cookies to recognize revisiting and logged in users. You accept the usage of these cookies by continue browsing this website.